Assessing a shortlisted candidate
Provides an overall fit verdict and competency-level scores tied to the requirements of a specific role. Direct quotations make the basis for each assessment visible.
— Talent & Leadership
Assesses one candidate against a specific role, producing an evidence-backed fit report with competency scores, strengths, gaps, risks and focused interview questions.
1–2 weeks → ~15 minutes
For one complete, review-ready pass
No coding required
— USE CASES
Provides an overall fit verdict and competency-level scores tied to the requirements of a specific role. Direct quotations make the basis for each assessment visible.
Identifies requirements the candidate’s documents leave unproven and supplies targeted interview questions. Keeps the discussion focused on evidence gaps that matter to the appointment.
Gives advisers and hiring managers a structured account of strengths, gaps and risks. Grounds the recommendation in documented evidence rather than a general impression of the candidate.
Assesses a candidate’s documented experience against the proposed role’s requirements. Clarifies which capabilities are evidenced and which need further validation.
— HOW IT BEHAVES
The mechanics behind this specific template — what it reads, what it calculates, and where a human stays in the loop.
Findings on the talent population are written up as a document that reads like professional output, with each claim tied back to a person.
The people land as a clean table you can sort, filter or drop straight into the deliverable.
Each person is assessed against explicit criteria you control, so the same standard is applied across the talent population on every run.
The run works from assessment and review evidence you supply, so conclusions about the talent population are anchored to your evidence rather than general model knowledge.
Candidate assessments often blur documented experience, interpretation and untested assumptions, making hiring recommendations difficult to defend. Assessing a shortlisted candidate is the typical trigger — provides an overall fit verdict and competency-level scores tied to the requirements of a specific role. Direct quotations make the basis for each assessment visible. Get it right and the conclusion holds up in the room; get it rushed and it gets picked apart. Either way it costs roughly 1–2 weeks of experienced attention.
As a Skill, the work is already sequenced. You bring the evidence, and the run produces overall candidate fit verdict plus role-specific competency assessment. The judgement is built in — how items are broken up, what standard they are held to, and where the run stops for a human review. The practical effect: 1–2 weeks of manual work becomes a ~15 minutes run, held to an identical standard on the tenth engagement as on the first.
Talent Fit exports as a structured SKILL.md file and is MCP-ready, so the same method runs in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or your own AI products. Adapt it to your methodology, and the intelligence stays yours — not locked to one vendor.
Defines credible career routes between a starting role and a target role, with competency criteria, evidence of readiness and development priorities that make progression expectations clear.
Maps realistic career moves across an organisation, showing how roles connect, which competencies support each move and what gaps people need to close.
Assesses how a leadership or project team’s experience and working styles fit its purpose, identifying complementary strengths, gaps and likely friction with practical recommendations for working together.
Defines a role’s purpose, outcomes, capabilities and decision accountabilities in an evidence-grounded blueprint, giving hiring managers and leaders a shared basis for selection and development.
Compares candidates against a shared, role-specific rubric, producing an evidence-backed assessment of their relative fit, key differentiators and trade-offs.
Assesses the leadership mix of up to 12 leaders against the demands of their strategy, producing an evidence-backed view of capability gaps and priorities for hiring, coaching or reallocating responsibilities.